• welcomes the proposal of the Commission and its efforts towards strategic autonomy of capital markets, increased internal clearing capacity and a more robust clearing system,
• expected a clearer stance on reducing exposure to UK central counterparties (CCPs) and more specific rules and incentives after Brexit,
• considers that it is crucial to have specific data about the EU clearing system covering all asset classes and volumes. Social, governance and environmental risks of CCPs must be included in risk models and have the same level of importance,
• requests a comprehensive evaluation of potential additional costs for the European Securities and Markets Authority and other EU bodies to accomplish with their reinforced role.
• is disappointed that the Commission did not assess the existing clearing framework. The proposed five-year deadline for the review of the new framework is too long,
• suggests that the EU CCPs must be transparent about their fees, margin calls and actions during periods of market stress, in order to improve predictability,
• asks the Commission to explain the specific definition of the term "urgently", and asks the co-legislators to establish which exemptions are considered "urgent" decisions,
• proposes that civil society is involved in the monitoring mechanism established under Article 23c, and that the EESC takes part of the Joint Monitoring Mechanism as an observer,
• considers that more should be done to reduce the time required to authorise or extend activities and services, as well as to build a central database. The EESC asks for more interoperability, a reduced administrative burden and simpler access solutions.